Pages

Identity and Social Movements

IDENTITY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

Can social movements change public
policy? If so, how?

By Rosemary Dryley

Social
movements have the ability to influence the government to make change in public
policy.These influences can be in the
forms of petitions, dramatic actions and rallies.The women’s social movement focussed on
issues such as the right to vote, equal pay and discrimination within the
workplace and home life.The women who
participated in this movement were generally identified as feminists.Feminists within this social movement were politically
active and extremely committed in changing public policy.Particular political issues raised by
feminists were the Right to Vote policy and the Equal Pay policy.

This
movement was one of the most important movements in Australia’s history.From its foundation women have not been
considered as equals whether in their home life or in the workplace.Feminists believed equality was a very broad
term which consisted factors such as gender politics, equality in morality
bodily harm and ensuring all women were treated fairly within their marriage (Lyons,
M. & P. Russell, 2005). Women
required the same rights as men in order to protect themselves, particularly as
in the early days of ‘Old Australia’ women were constantly harassed by their
husbands and received little respect in other aspects of their lives, so, they
required the right to vote (Lyons, M. & P. Russell, 2005).During the early-18000’s, ‘The Womanhood’s
Suffrage League’ organised a petition which was to be signed by supporters for
the right to vote and given to the government (Burgmann, V., 2003).This petition was signed by the WSL executive
and Nellie Alma Martel which influenced this public policy to be changed (Nugent,
A., 2005), but not until 1894 (Nugent, A., 2005). By 1908 other states in Australia had allowed
women to vote in both all elections. Obtaining the right to vote was just the first
step in equality.As feminists had
discovered how they were able to influence the government, they decided that
something needed to be done with how they were treated at work and their pay, particularly
as it was considerably lower than men.

In
the workplace, men were in charge and paid considerably more than women, even
if they were performing the same job and had the same skills.Women also dealt with considerable
discrimination when applying for a job or dealing with difficult issues within
the workplace.Feminists were keen to
see change in the equal pay policy but were at a loss as they were
failing.In order to gain the government
and the media’s attentions they would often take drastic action.Some examples of drastic actions were
chaining themselves to public buildings (Burgmann, V., 2003) and harassing
local business that had a strict anti-women policy (Burgmann, V., 2003), which
would do nothing but disrupt the public and gain unnecessary attention.Though the government was able to see their
desperate cries for change, they would not reward them with equal pay.After World War 2, women were required to
replace men and work in factories, farms and hospitals, yet women were still paid
considerably lower (Burgmann, V., 2003).They needed the equal pay so they could provide food and clothing to
their children, particularly as they were living on one salary while their
husbands were fighting in the war.In
1969, there was an ‘Equal Pay Case’ hearing in the courtroom where women were
informed they would not be paid equally, no matter if they were doing the same
role as a man (Burgmann, V., 2003, P. 116).”Angered by this blatant case of inequality, women in the Melbourne
Women’s Action Committee (WMAC) “organised
a massive tram ride where women insisted on only paying 75 per cent of the
fare, ‘as a protest against women receiving lower salaries and paying full
service for all commodities and services’ (Burgmann, V., 2003, P. 116).”As a result of this protest, among many
others that took place, changes were not implemented until the years between
1972 and 1974.An ‘equal pay for equal work’ policy (Burgmann, V., 2003, P. 116) was
allocated to women who were dominating in female industries (Burgmann, V.,
2003) such as textiles, administration/secretarial services and care.In 1974, a man’s basic rate of pay was
substituted to be the same as an adult’s rate of pay (Burgmann, V., 2003).While this change in policy was considered to
be a positive impact, it was still not enough.Women were not only suffering inequality in pay but this was a blatant
case of discrimination.Equality in pay and
discrimination are still policies which are being amended today.Alongside inequalities in pay rates, women
also have to deal with discrimination while applying for a job or handling
harassment in the workplace.

During
the ‘second wave’ feminist social movement in the 1980’s, discrimination in the
workplace was a key factor.Women were
upset they still had to deal with issues that men did not.Women were being discriminated against based
on their sex and if they had a child.This
was becoming such an issue that in 1984, the government established ‘the Sex
Discrimination Act’ policy.This policy
act made it illegal for any employer to discriminate a woman or man from being
employed in their company no matter their age, sex, religion or their status
(financially and marital) (Fenna, Alana, 2004).This act was meant to create unity and fairness within the
workplace.Later, in 1987, the
government established the Equal Employment Opportunities (Hutchinson, J, &
Eveline, J, 2010) to ensure there was no discrimination in the workplace not
just for women, but for the disabled and Indigenous Australians.Though this was in place, studies have found
that discrimination and harassment still exists and not just within the
workplace, but to women in general.These studies have been reported in the paper ‘Workplace Bullying Policy in the Australian Public Sector: Why Has Gender
Been Ignored?’ by Hutchinson, J. & Eveline, J. They make considerable
references that harassment in the workplace is aimed at both men and women,
just in different ways.Women were
appointed terms of endearment such as ‘love’, which can be considered
belittling and is inappropriate, particularly in a workplace (Hutchinson,
J, & Eveline, J, 2010).Men also suffer harassment but in different
ways to women (Hutchinson, J, & Eveline, J, 2010).Though they are harassed, it is not nearly to the measures that women
are.

In
Melbourne, women in the second wave movement organised a rally to attempt
change in discrimination against their sex.This rally was named ‘Reclaim the Night’, and in some aspects, while
very similar to the recent ‘SlutWalk’s’ that have appeared across the globe
over the past year, both are vastly different.Reclaim the Night was a rally which protested against sexual violence
and the threats that came along with how women were dressed.This rally was women’s-only and “strictly dress-down affair” (Rundle, G.,
2011) whose message was strictly about gender politics.The way the Reclaim the Night protestors made
their point was by dressing provocatively (for their time) and they bombarded
the seedy streets of Melbourne.The
SlutWalk’s rally, however, while still about gender politics appeared to
receive more attention on their provocative dress code, which was anything
goes, and men were allowed to join in.The SlutWalk rally began from a statement made by a Canadian police officer
who accidentally made the remark that if women were scantily clad, they should
expect whatever sexual harassment they get from men (SlutWalk Melbourne, 2011).The reason why this rally did not work was
due to the media’s focus on their dress code and the fact that they were
thinking too broadly about their rally’s concept – they were not direct
enough.When shifting through the media
coverage on the SlutWalk, the majority of it is thousands of images of the
costumes.Because there were no rules on
the dress-code of this rally, when watching it, it did not look like a
political protest at all. They gained attention certainly, but not for the
appropriate reasons. These rallies are
examples of social movements that have not changed any public policies in any
way. While the public has the ability to
influence the government to change public policies, the Prime Ministers and the
government have the ability to make change themselves.

During
the 1970’s Gough Whitlam was determined to make changes in the various public
policies as he was aware the values and concerns of the Australian public were
constantly evolving.He made significant
change in regards to the conscription, particular women’s issues, such as the
contraceptive pill and equal pay rights (Time, 2012).Whitlam changed the conscription policy so it
no longer allowed children to be forcibly sent to fight in the war.From Whitlam’s actions towards the issues in
the women’s movement, one might consider him to be somewhat of a ‘feminist’.He strongly encouraged the Commonwealth
Conciliation and Arbitration Commission to implement the equal pay of women (Time,
2012).Even though this was implemented,
the difference of men and women’s pay rates are still not equal – but it is
still a vast improvement and can only improve in the years to come. While he
did not support or approve of the legalization of women’s right to Abortion, he
did support the use of the contraceptive pill and discontinued the 27 per cent
sales tax, which enabled the contraceptive pill to be available for purchase at
affordable amounts within the National Health Scheme (Time, 2012).By giving women the ability to have easier
access to the contraceptive pill, they were able to have more control over
their life.They had the ability to choose
when was the right time to start a family so that it would not disrupt
education or career paths.

As
mentioned earlier in this essay, the Equal Employment Opportunities policy was
established to make it immoral to discriminate a woman from being employed, and
to help encourage women to find employment (Hutchinson, J, & Eveline, J,
2010).Since then, women have fully
embraced the concept of working and having a career.This is seen in the workplace – in some
industries there are more women than men.Whilst John Howard was Prime Minister (1996-2007), in 1999, he and his
party established the ‘Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999’ (Hutchinson,
J, & Eveline, J, 2010).This policy
was to ensure women would not be discriminated against when applying for a job
or for educational services to update their skills to give them a fulfilling
career (Hutchinson, J, & Eveline, J, 2010).Due to this policy, women were becoming more interested in securing a
career rather than having children.However,
just as Howard established this policy, he created another policy which seemed
to be hypocritical of his original intentions.He established the ‘baby bonus’, as a way to gain the vote of women.The baby bonus was a payment offer from $500
to $2500 that was paid on the condition that the woman who accepted it was to
be housebound when she had children, for 5 years (Megalogenis, G., 2003).Those who would do this would receive the
$2500 payment were women who were earning more than $55,000 each year (Megalogenis,
G., 2003).This policy was ultimately
unsuccessful as the majority of women wanted to be able to return to work
within 6 months of the birth of their new child.It was unrealistic of John Howard to suggest
women would want to stay at home for such a long period of time, especially
considering the expenses that a newborn will bring.This would also mean that mortgage and
utility bills would increase heavily during that time (Megalogenis, G., 2003).This policy completely missed the point and
the government’s policy was not consistent with the social movement as he did
not realise that today, most women want to have a career of their own as well
as having a family.If women were to
stay at home for the first 5 years after giving birth, they would have a high
risk of losing their job or their skills would not be useful when they return
to work.

To
conclude, the policies for these issues are the results of the actions taken
place within the women’s social movement.As the examples in this essay have demonstrated, there are proper ways
of gaining the support of the government and the public to change
policies.While some actions and
protests are attention-grabbing, they have demonstrated that there are appropriate
ways to do this.While the public has
attempted to do what they can to make change it ultimately comes down to what
the government is willing to do.Whitlam
has demonstrated to us that he did want to make positive changes for women and
believed in equal pay for all.Howard’s
approach however, was not the appropriate way.All of the examples discussed are evidence that there is room for change
in public policies within the Australian Government.

Reference List

Burgmann, Verity, 2003,Power, Profit and Protest: Australian Social Movements and
Globalisation, e-book, accessed 26 May 2012.